BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT and BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION Lassen
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT and BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION FOR THE Lassen 15 Restoration Project Modoc National Forest Prepared by: Mary Flores /s/ Mary Flores 28 October 2017 John Clark /s/ John Clark 28 October 2017 I. INTRODUCTION This Biological Assessment/Evaluation (BA/BE) documents the potential effects to terrestrial USDA Forest Service Region 5 wildlife species by the implementation of activities considered in the Lassen 15 Restoration Project (Lassen 15 Project) Environmental Analysis. The Lassen 15 project area is located on the Warner Mountain Ranger District roughly five air miles northeast of Davis Creek, California. The proposed project area is 25,276 acres, although only 8,004 acres are targeted for treatment. Biological Assessments and Evaluations document the analysis necessary to ensure proposed management actions would not jeopardize the continued existence of, or cause adverse modification of habitat for federally listed or Forest Service sensitive species as described in the Forest Service Manual (FSM section 2672.43) (USFS 2005). This BA/BE was prepared in accordance with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and follows standards established in Forest Service Manual direction (FSM 2671.2 and 2672.42) for threatened, endangered and sensitive (TES) wildlife species. The determination of whether to include wildlife species in this analysis was based on review of (1) the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service IPAC data (website accessed on 22 October 2015) and (2) Forest Service Region 5 sensitive species list (October 2013). Table 1 displays whether the project is within the range of the species, whether suitable habitat is contained within or adjacent to the project, and whether the species has been previously detected within the area. Geographical Information System (GIS) queries for Table 1 used a minimum 3-mile radius from the project area unless otherwise noted. State designations came from the following website: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=109405&inline. Table 1. List of TES terrestrial wildlife species on the Modoc National Forest and the status of each within the Lassen 15 Project Area. Species Suitable detected habitat TES within or within or Species name Species addressed in this document? status adjacent to adjacent project to project area? area? Gray wolf (Canis lupus) FE, SE No Yes No, there have been no wolf dens or rendezvous sites detected within the project area to date. Northern spotted owl FT, ST No No No, project is outside range of species, which (Strix occidentalis consists of the Medicine Lake Highlands for caurina) the Modoc NF. Yellow-billed cuckoo FT, SE No No No, there are no suitable riparian forests (Coccyzus americanus within the project area. In addition, the USFS occidentalis) Pacific Southwest Regional Office did not include the Modoc NF in the range of this species on their most recent species list. Fisher (Pekania pennanti) FP, No No No, the USFS Pacific Southwest Regional ST, Office did not include the Modoc NF in the FSS range of this species. 2 Species Suitable detected habitat TES within or within or Species name Species addressed in this document? status adjacent to adjacent project to project area? area? Greater sage-grouse FC, FSS No No No, there are no large expanses of sagebrush in (Centrocersus the Lassen 15 project; there is no occupied urophasianus) habitat near the project area Pacific marten (Martes FSS No Yes Yes caurina) Bald eagle (Haliaeetus FSS Yes Yes Yes leucocephalus) Bing’s checkerspot FSS, SE No Yes No, suitable habitat is found outside of butterfly (Euphydryas proposed treatment units. editha bingi) California spotted owl FSS No No No, the project is outside range of species, (Strix occidentalis which is exclusively found on Manzanita occidentalis) Peak, Modoc NF. California wolverine (Gulo PT, ST No Yes No, there is a lack of remote, high-elevation gulo luscus) habitat within proposed treatment units. Fringed myotis (Myotis FSS No Yes Yes thysanodes) Great gray owl (Strix FSS, SE No Yes Yes nebulosa) Greater sandhill crane FSS Yes No No, cranes have been sighted foraging in (Grus canadensis tabida) Bear Valley in unsuitable nesting habitat; RCA standards would protect habitat. Northern goshawk FSS Yes Yes Yes (Accipiter gentilis) Pallid bat (Antrozous FSS No Yes Yes pallidus) Pygmy rabbit FSS No No No, there are no suitable sagebrush stands (Brachylagus idahoensis) with friable soils within or adjacent to the project area. Townsend’s big-eared bat FSS No No No, due to lack of roost habitat in or near (Corynorhinus townsendii) project area. Western bumble bee FSS No Yes Yes. Species will be covered in a separate (Bombus occidentalis) document. Symbols used: FT = threatened, FP= proposed for listing, FC = candidate for listing, FSS = Region 5 Forest Service sensitive, SE = State Endangered, ST = State Threatened Gray wolf Based on information from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the historical range of the wolf in California most likely included the Sierra Nevada, southern Cascades, Modoc Plateau, Klamath Mountains and perhaps the North Coast Ranges. Although wolves were extirpated from California nearly 90 years ago, there have been unconfirmed sightings of wolves within and around Modoc County within the past few years. The first wolf to enter California, since they had been extirpated, was OR-7. He entered California on 28 December 2011, and has returned to Oregon. Confirmed wolf sightings have been made in Modoc (California), Siskiyou (California), Klamath (Oregon), and Lake (Oregon) counties, since the summer of 2015. The 3 closest known den site to the Lassen Creek Project Area is in Lake County (Oregon) roughly 65 air miles northwest. The Lassen Pack is approximately 100 miles from the Lassen 15 project area (T. Rickman, pers. comm.). Wolves were delisted in eastern Oregon; they remain listed in western Oregon and in California. Any individuals found on the Modoc NF would be treated as listed. Based on a discussion with the USFWS staff, if a den site were located or pups were detected, consultation would occur (D. Blake and E. Willy, pers. comm.). Wolves’ primary habitat requirements are the presence of adequate water and prey, mainly elk and deer (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/nongame/wolf/FAQ.html). All of the acres within the Lassen 15 project area would be considered as suitable habitat. As evidenced by recent wolf behavior, there are no barriers to dispersal either north into Oregon or south into the Sierra Nevada. The proposed thinning and burning may improve the habitat for wolf prey species. If a wolf den or pups were detected during layout or implementation, activities would be halted and the USFWS would be contacted to begin emergency consultation. Given the lack of confirmed wolf dens in spite of several unconfirmed wolf sightings near the project area and the habitat generalist nature of wolves, the implementation of the activities discussed in the action alternative of the Lassen 15 EA would have no effect on gray wolf; the no action alternative would also have no effect on gray wolf. Riparian Dependent Species Willow Flycatcher Willow flycatcher was formerly a sensitive species for the Modoc NF. No breeding pairs have been detected in twenty years of surveys on the Forest; therefore, the Pacific Southwest Regional Office removed it from the Modoc NF’s sensitive species list and it is not analyzed within this document. However, it was addressed in the Migratory Landbird Conservation Report prepared for this project. Bald Eagle Multiple creeks and wet meadows are present within and adjacent to the project area. Bald eagle will be discussed in the Effects of Proposed Project section. Greater Sandhill Crane Although greater sandhill cranes have been detected foraging on two separate occasions in the past in Bear Valley and due west of the Forest boundary on private lands (T46 N, R14 E, section 2), there is no freshwater emergent nesting habitat within the project area. Best Management Practices would protect meadow habitat, where they were seen foraging; currently there are no activities planned in riparian vegetation in Bear Valley. Road improvements would be of short- term duration; given the sporadic appearance of cranes in the Bear Valley area, effects from disturbance would be discountable. Therefore, there would be no effect to sandhill cranes by the implementation of the no action or action alternatives proposed in the Lassen 15 EA. 4 Yellow-Billed Cuckoo Although the yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) occurs on the USFWS species list for Modoc County, there has been no record of this species for the Modoc National Forest in any of the data sets available to the Forest. Modoc County was not included in the historical distribution of cuckoos for California in the petition to list this species dated 25 July 2001. In addition, cuckoos have not been detected during various riparian bird surveys conducted in potential habitat locally (e.g. Point Reyes Bird Observatory and Great Basin Bird Observatory surveys on Bureau of Land Management lands from 1997 to 1999 and from 2002 to 2004; BBS). Finally, the USFS Pacific Southwest Regional Office did not include the Modoc NF in the range of this species on their most recent species list. In California, the yellow-billed cuckoos’ presence is limited to the breeding season. Nesting habitat for this species includes dense stands of various riparian species including willow (Salix sp.) and cottonwood (Populus sp.). They nest most frequently in willows, while cottonwoods are used extensively for foraging. Yellow-billed cuckoos are primarily insectivorous and forage mainly on tree and shrub branches (Hughes 1999). Canopy height in occupied habitat was 5–30 m (16-98 feet); understory height 1–6 m (3-20 feet) (Laymon and Halterman 1989 in Hughes 2015). Patch size of habitat inhabited by cuckoos along the Sacramento River was 25 acres and greater (Gaines 1974 and Laymon et al 1993 in USFWS 2001) and 99 acres (Halterman 1991 in USFWS 2001); they preferred patches of riparian habitat that were greater than 81 ha (447 acres) in size and at least 100 m (328 feet) in width (USFWS 2013 in Hughes 2015).